Preharvest glyphosate in alfalfa for seed production: Control of Canada thistle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada thistle [Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop.] is increasing in both frequency and density in Saskatchewan alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) seed fields. Application of preharvest glyphosate is an effective means of controlling Canada thistle in annual crops. This study was conducted to determine the effects of preharvest glyphosate on Canada thistle control and crop tolerance in alfalfa seed fields. Five field experiments were conducted in northeast Saskatchewan between 1995 and 1997 in which preharvest glyphosate was applied at 0, 220, 440, 660, 880, and 1760 g a.i. ha -1 when 60–70% of alfalfa seed pods were brown. Glyphosate did not affect seed yield in the year of application at any application rate, nor germination and subsequent emergence of the harvested seed. Alfalfa regrowth in the year following application declined linearly as the rate of preharvest glyphosate increased. Seed yield was also reduced in the year following glyphosate application. Glyphosate application at 220 g a.i. ha -1 significantly reduced Canada thistle regrowth in the year following application. Canada thistle density decreased in 2 of 4 site years with increasing rates of preharvest glyphosate. Using preharvest glyphosate at rates higher than 220 g a.i. ha -1 in seed alfalfa is not recommended when future seed harvest is planned. However, higher rates of preharvest glyphosate could be used in the final year of seed production to facilitate alfalfa removal. Key words: Preharvest glyphosate, abnormal seeds, seed quality, germination, hard seed and emergence
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".